| Posted | Nick | Remark | |
|---|---|---|---|
| #openstack-nova - 2024-09-10 | |||
| 16:02:10 | dansmith | o/ | |
| 16:02:11 | sean-k-mooney | o/ | |
| 16:02:12 | gmann | o/ | |
| 16:02:17 | bauzas | hey everyone | |
| 16:02:20 | bauzas | nice to see you | |
| 16:02:24 | sean-k-mooney | welcome back | |
| 16:02:35 | bauzas | sorry, was away last week for the OIF Summit Asia | |
| 16:02:36 | tkajinam | o/ | |
| 16:03:26 | auniyal | o/ | |
| 16:03:28 | bauzas | #topic Bugs (stuck/critical) | |
| 16:03:50 | bauzas | #info No Critical bug | |
| 16:03:58 | bauzas | #info Add yourself in the team bug roster if you want to help https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/nova-bug-triage-roster | |
| 16:04:14 | bauzas | any bug report people would want to discuss ? | |
| 16:04:48 | dansmith | maybe one | |
| 16:04:58 | dansmith | I filed the bug against oslo and nova, | |
| 16:05:11 | bauzas | shoot | |
| 16:05:15 | dansmith | but sean-k-mooney, are you still working on excluding the safety check for the ephemeral disks? | |
| 16:05:16 | sean-k-mooney | https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/2079850 | |
| 16:05:41 | sean-k-mooney | i have a draft of that locally the unit test are failing so im tryign to fix that | |
| 16:05:52 | dansmith | the oslo fix is +2 but it'll take a release and u-c bump before we get it | |
| 16:05:54 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: okay cool | |
| 16:06:16 | bauzas | ergh | |
| 16:06:42 | bauzas | yet another reason to work on the image backend refactoring if you want MHO | |
| 16:06:45 | dansmith | bauzas: basically, if you have nova format your ephemerals as vfat for you, you'll hit this fail | |
| 16:07:00 | dansmith | yes, it's really stupid that we're even doing this, and it's at least partially because of the design of the imagebackend | |
| 16:07:16 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] Add functional repoducer for ephemeral disks https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/928310 | |
| 16:07:17 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: only saftey check bootable files created form glance https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/928829 | |
| 16:07:17 | opendevreview | sean mooney proposed openstack/nova master: [WIP] adapt to vfat support in oslo.utils https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/nova/+/928462 | |
| 16:07:25 | sean-k-mooney | thats what im working on ^ | |
| 16:07:30 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: cool thanks | |
| 16:07:34 | bauzas | formatting ephemerals to vfat is like "I don't care about my fs, dude" | |
| 16:07:45 | sean-k-mooney | still failing unit test but i should get those passing today | |
| 16:07:55 | dansmith | bauzas: right, it's pointless for us to even do that anyway, because nobody would actually use them as fat anyway | |
| 16:08:05 | dansmith | bauzas: double pointless behavior :) | |
| 16:08:13 | bauzas | I assume this would be for additional disks ? | |
| 16:08:18 | dansmith | ephemerals | |
| 16:08:30 | sean-k-mooney | i propoaded not formatign ephemeral disk by default before | |
| 16:08:42 | sean-k-mooney | we have a blueprint for that that i think we shoudl do in epoxy | |
| 16:08:47 | dansmith | yeah, sean-k-mooney I'm on board with that too | |
| 16:09:21 | sean-k-mooney | but for right now just skipign the safty check if the disk is not bootable and thats only set when we chreat ephermal/swap disks in my patch above | |
| 16:09:21 | bauzas | ring me a bell, I know what ephemeral disks are in nova, but I wonder *why* people would want vfat | |
| 16:09:42 | sean-k-mooney | bauzas: its our default when you dont set a config option or image property | |
| 16:09:45 | bauzas | probably because they think "ephemeral" means the disks are not persisted (which is not the case) | |
| 16:09:56 | sean-k-mooney | we choose it as the only format that would work for every os | |
| 16:10:23 | sean-k-mooney | not it was just because we needed something that works on linux and windows | |
| 16:10:32 | dansmith | vfat would only be for windows guests so they see something on the disk instead of blank | |
| 16:10:33 | sean-k-mooney | if you set os_type in teh image we use ntfs or ext4 | |
| 16:10:37 | dansmith | but makes no actual sense | |
| 16:10:52 | dansmith | sean-k-mooney: we actually support ntfs? | |
| 16:10:54 | sean-k-mooney | or if you set the config option we use what you set as the fallback | |
| 16:11:01 | sean-k-mooney | yep | |
| 16:11:11 | sean-k-mooney | im not saying you should use it | |
| 16:11:11 | dansmith | either way, we're not partitioning the disk properly anyway.. I guess I'm surprised windows is happy with a whole-disk ntfs | |
| 16:11:15 | sean-k-mooney | but the code is there | |
| 16:11:33 | sean-k-mooney | https://docs.openstack.org/nova/latest/configuration/config.html#DEFAULT.default_ephemeral_format | |
| 16:11:34 | dansmith | yeah, I would never use linux-created ntfs for production if I was a windows user | |
| 16:12:06 | sean-k-mooney | well cloud model. as a end user you should not know if its hyperv or libvirt/qemu | |
| 16:12:30 | bauzas | but you know the image you use | |
| 16:12:34 | sean-k-mooney | its in the default section because this applies to other drivers | |
| 16:12:51 | dansmith | I mean as the operator I would never configure that, | |
| 16:13:03 | dansmith | but you're right, users may not realize they are getting ntfs created by linux that they shouldn't trust :) | |
| 16:13:31 | bauzas | agreed on not configure it if I was admin, I'd just assume nova would create me ephemerals that my instance can read | |
| 16:13:32 | sean-k-mooney | anyway we can carry this discussion forward to the reveiws | |
| 16:13:36 | dansmith | yeah | |
| 16:13:42 | sean-k-mooney | but next cycle we can add unformated and set that as the default | |
| 16:13:59 | sean-k-mooney | https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/default-ephemeral-format-unformated | |
| 16:14:01 | dansmith | with docs and renos suggesting to leave it that way | |
| 16:14:21 | sean-k-mooney | we can flag the option with advnaced if we like | |
| 16:14:52 | sean-k-mooney | https://docs.openstack.org/oslo.config/latest/reference/defining.html#advanced-option | |
| 16:15:39 | sean-k-mooney | anyway we can likely move on | |
| 16:15:42 | dansmith | yup | |
| 16:15:46 | bauzas | okay | |
| 16:15:58 | bauzas | action items are on reviewing the oslo.utils patch, right? | |
| 16:16:08 | dansmith | no, | |
| 16:16:21 | dansmith | that's on the oslo people and tkajinam has already +2d and asked the other cores to hit it | |
| 16:16:35 | dansmith | but again, it won't solve our problem until release/bump | |
| 16:16:53 | dansmith | the action item on us should be getting sean's actual fix working,reviewed,merged | |
| 16:16:55 | dansmith | (IMHO) | |
| 16:17:16 | sean-k-mooney | i have a patch at the end for compatiblity with the oslo change too | |
| 16:17:17 | bauzas | are we talking of https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22ephmeral-and-swap-backing-files%22 ? | |
| 16:17:50 | sean-k-mooney | the first 2 patches yes but ill change the topic of that to the bug topic later | |
| 16:17:58 | bauzas | cool | |
| 16:18:12 | bauzas | I guess then we can move on | |
| 16:18:22 | tkajinam | I can push the oslo.utils to gate if it doesn't get attention from the other cores and hard blocks nova release but note that we may need a few more steps (backport to 2024.1, new release in 2024.1 and req bump) | |
| 16:18:30 | bauzas | but do we feel this as a regression bug ? | |
| 16:18:32 | tkajinam | which might mean that RC1 release of nova might be delayed because of it | |
| 16:18:46 | bauzas | heh, jinxed by tkajinam | |
| 16:18:53 | tkajinam | s/2024.1/2024.2/g | |
| 16:19:01 | tkajinam | :-) | |
| 16:19:04 | sean-k-mooney | tkajinam: its not a hard block really but it is a regression that might require an rc2 | |
| 16:19:11 | tkajinam | ok | |
| 16:19:12 | dansmith | it's not an oslo regression | |
| 16:19:20 | bauzas | it's a nova regression | |
| 16:19:26 | sean-k-mooney | yep | |
| 16:19:28 | dansmith | it is a nova one, but again, it feels like we need to fix our own code anyway | |
| 16:19:32 | bauzas | so we need to merge sean's patches before RC1 | |
| 16:19:47 | sean-k-mooney | ideally but i need to get it passing first | |
| 16:19:48 | tkajinam | ok | |
| 16:19:51 | bauzas | or deliver RC1 and adress them in RC2 | |
| 16:20:16 | dansmith | so we could aim to get sean's stuff in to fix, | |